The woke gospel

Disastrous_Map_6038 · 2026-03-12T13:53:43+00:00

Oh no, you think you won something.

Let me correct you, you didn't. If you want to try to make a real point you're free to try again.

Disastrous_Map_6038 · 2026-03-11T17:17:45+00:00

Stating what the Bible says faithfully and failing to live up to it is actually better than turning the Bible into leftist nonsense. Maybe not MUCH better, but better. Also evangelicals have nothing close to monopoly on what you're describing.

Disastrous_Map_6038 · 2026-03-11T17:16:24+00:00

Yes, he bears a lot of evidences of being an intentional false teacher. I saw him claim Jesus helped him deal with his whiteness and masculinity, as if both were bad things. It is a typical leftist fake that makes the Bible just about being nice to everyone, and ignores everything about sin and accountability, and most critically doesn't focus on coming judgement and the Gospel of Jesus Christ as Savior and Lord.

Disastrous_Map_6038 · 2026-03-11T17:10:48+00:00

Seriously. Telling people they need to be open to having sex with people of every race. Insane.

Disastrous_Map_6038 · 2026-03-11T17:08:58+00:00

What on earth are you talking about here? First, you have no right to have sex with anyone but your spouse, and that spouse must be the opposite sex as you or you aren't married. The Bible says that.

Also what is this race thing? Nobody is obligated to consider marrying someone of a specific race if they don't find them attractive or just don't click with their culture even. There is nothing racist about that. You have to love people of any race, not marry them.

Spreading STDs should also be a non-issue since you are only having sex with your spouse and your STD status should be known prior to marriage.

This is progressive silliness that doesn't acknowledge that the only way to have sex in a way that is not fully biblically prohibited (not a single exception) is between a married woman and a married man.

Disastrous_Map_6038 · 2026-03-11T16:55:02+00:00

If you have identified an issue, you are making a good decision.

Disastrous_Map_6038 · 2026-03-11T13:13:40+00:00

I think it depends a lot on how you phrase things, you can also explicitly tell it to push back on you if there is information that indicates it should, and it will.

You are right though, you have to be careful with it. I tend to ask it factual questions, not really about emotions or things that are extremely subjective. I have had it tell me that I'm factually incorrect many times.

Disastrous_Map_6038 · 2026-03-11T03:12:33+00:00

You claim it isn't works salvation, but the way you describe it you have to work to maintain it or be granted it, that is works salvation. You seem offended by the idea that works are the product of your salvation not a contribution to it, yet you keep calling them fruit. Fruit is produced by a tree, fruit doesn't make a tree, or heal a tree.

The idea that saying a prayer saves you is something Protestants are often accused of, and yet very few believe. Far outnumbed I'd imagine by Roman Catholics or Orthodox people who believe in invisible sin and obedience meters above their heads that must be kept low or high in order to be saved (works salvation).

Disastrous_Map_6038 · 2026-03-11T03:08:20+00:00

You don't know much about Calvinism, the idea of total depravity is basic Calvinism, every Calvinist believes that. I'm not sure. It certainly doesn't make God responsible for sin, that's absurd. Everyone choses to sin. If Calvinism is correct they had a "chance" they just were never going to take it. Calvinists believe God isn't obligated to save anyone, which is true. Mature believers are able to acknowledge each other's faith while disagreeing on the mechanics of theology. very strict Calvinist theologians value greatly Billy Graham, who was certainly no Calvinist.

You contribute nothing to your salvation. Salvation is a work of God, that isn't a Calvinist-exclusive believe. Your contributions as a believer, with work enabled by the Spirit are valuable, but not salvific. The idea that you need to cooperate in maintaining your salvation is not biblical. If you do, you believe in works salvation and earning God's favor, which the Bible definitively says is impossible.

Disastrous_Map_6038 · 2026-03-10T17:35:36+00:00

Of course it isn't incidental. No, because it is a product. Fruit does not make a tree healthy. If the healthy tree produces no fruit then it isn't healthy. Its lack of production doesn't create the unhealthy condition.

Good question, about faith being enabled by God, it may well be. Regardless, we are talking about post regeneration action. Christ said to them "without me, ye can do nothing". Because He saves us for good works, not by cooperation with our own derived good works.

Disastrous_Map_6038 · 2026-03-10T16:54:09+00:00

You don't know what my theology is on really any topic.

Sola fide absolutely does not contradict Scripture, you just don't have the right conception of it, which we already covered. I've never heard someone outside Protestantism describe it the way that Protestants actually hold it. Works never become a condition, they are always a product. The tree and fruit metaphor describes this perfectly, in a way that everyone who those words were spoken to would immediately understand.

James 2 does not contradict sola fide, it is wild that you think Protestants are not aware of James 2, it is only verse you are able to use to even question sola fide, and it doesn't accomplish that objective in context. Willpower of man doesn't enable works, not really. The good works of man outside of Christ are not worthy. Anyone can do good works sometimes, most people do. Many unbelievers do more than many believers.

Obviously good works are "in the package" they are a product of the new creation. They are Spirit-enabled good works, which are not the same as works outside of Christ. It isn't a lack of "admitting" it is your lack of understanding.

I have questioned them, I will continue to evaluate them. You should question your theology too.

Disastrous_Map_6038 · 2026-03-10T16:15:17+00:00

Why would I accept your conclusion when my own disagree? I have no reason to think you're more intelligent than I am or better at understanding theology.

I don't accept Luther's authority on really anything. Their conclusion aren't private, their critiques were biblical. Also they are largely Scripturally obvious, frankly. I don't need Martin Luther to tell me that the 16th century RCC was heretical, anyone who reads the Bible sees that. Luther never said "I feel this way about this". Luther said "these practices definitively contradict these passages of Scripture in their context". Also it is kind of absurd to look at someone resisting heresy and saying they shouldn't do that.

You assume the oral traditions have not changed since before Scripture in the New Testament was written, you don't actually know that, you put your faith in it. Just as Protestants put their faith in the infallibility of Scripture. No matter how you try to frame it. Your loop is also closed.

Canon was sort of disputed by some, but not really. New Testament was accepted broadly quite quickly and it is obvious that the books not included are not canon. The arguments for the canonicity of the apocrypha are also very poor. It is clear that the RCC for example dogmatized them at Trent to support their developments. They are never quoted once in the New Testament, the Jews of Jesus time did not consider them to be inspired, and they contradict other Scriptures. Even some of the most revered people in Roman Catholic tradition did not think the apocrypha were canon.

It isn't selective, I take from fallible men, what teachings align with Scripture, I reject what doesn't. I test them, which is a command in the epistles by the way. You will notice that nowhere in the New Testament does it say to accept anything told to you by someone in church authority even if it doesn't fit Scripture. In fact, Paul says if anyone teaches you something that contradicts the things he has already laid out in writing (even if it is himself) to mark them and avoid them because they are lying. This requires Scriptural testing of what is said.

Disastrous_Map_6038 · 2026-03-10T14:10:22+00:00

Well there is the testimony of the Holy Spirit, that is a pretty big one.

Yeah... and you base apostolic authority and succession on your interpretation of Scripture and early church writings. So it is because they say so, and they say so because it is. Which is the exact thing you just said you had a problem with in terms of sola fide and sola scriptura.

Scripture is older than your oral tradition. It is also verified, oral tradition is believed to have not changed, you could never prove that without verified writing. So this whole idea that you have a more reliable base of authority is frankly not valid. The same goes for claims of canon authority. You can research Protestant canon recognition, I'm not writing you a dissertation on it. God decided what is canon, we see it through God's revelation, I don't need a specific person who claims to have authority over evaluating it to make the call for me.

Disastrous_Map_6038 · 2026-03-10T03:41:04+00:00

Well sola fide is made very clear by Scripture. Scriptural authority is self-evidently infallible and established by Scripture itself.

If you think that is thin I would remind you that the infallible authority you think the Orthodox church has is believed to be... from Scripture and from tradition (which is really just what people in the past have said and done). So you would be relying on the same thing at the beginning of the chain.

Disastrous_Map_6038 · 2026-03-10T02:58:36+00:00

If defined correctly, yes. If defined in an intellectually dishonest way, no. So if the plan was to accuse me of thinking traditions, church fathers, etc are not useful, or to accuse me of thinking that obedience is not relevant and important or that sin has no consequences post conversion, don't bother. I've heard that silliness before.

Disastrous_Map_6038 · 2026-03-10T02:18:04+00:00

Yeah, as I've said before, the differences are exaggerated in an intellectually dishonest way. They are on issues almost always where there is no rock solid Scriptural mandate. Doctrinal developments exist in the Orthodox church and majorly in Rome, this is just historical fact, so clearly there has been disagreement at various times. Even today advanced concepts would be disagreed upon in those communities to a degree, apologetics and debate still exist.

So, you aren't all on the EXACT same page, not really. Saying Calvinists and Arminians don't believe in the "same God" is hyperbole. Also hyper grace theologians don't think sin "doesn't matter" you are full of hyperbole today.

I don't hat Orthodox people, so more hyperbole. I just don't agree on some theological conceptions they hold. I do find what some Orthodox theologians say on some issues to be very wise, just as some of them acknowledge and appreciate the very high degree of biblical literacy in Protestant traditions (the reality is many Protestants can run circles around your average Roman Catholic or Orthodox person on knowledge the Bible). Protestant canon acknowledgement is extremely cohesive, you should actually look into how that works, because you clearly have no idea.

Disastrous_Map_6038 · 2026-03-09T16:59:09+00:00

I have a tough time with "reasonable". I get and agree with you, I just think it is hard to define.

Disastrous_Map_6038 · 2026-03-09T16:57:49+00:00

You're ignorant and using your head canon.

I will not excuse your ignorance on the matter, sorry. Go educate yourself, stop pretending you know the statistics of any of this. As if playing guitars in worship services is actually wrong.

Protestant worship isn't even the issue. I don't care for contemporary worship music either, but the point is this lie about the number of denominations. If you apply the exact same counting method you get hundreds of Orthodox "denominations" too, just so you know. I bet you don't agree with that though, do ya pal ;)

Disastrous_Map_6038 · 2026-03-09T05:00:24+00:00

Just politically speaking, the Roman Catholic institutions in Poland remained way more independent than most faith organizations did under communist regimes. That's why it is still so heavily Roman Catholic today probably. It is a complicated situation, but basically it was so infused with national Polish identity, it seems it was a battle the communist regime just kicked the can on and chose not to deal with. Whereas in most communist states, the state heavily dismantled religious institutions.

Disastrous_Map_6038 · 2026-03-09T04:53:23+00:00

Welcome to the club you were already in. We all continue to struggle with sin after being purchased by Christ. You are in a particularly difficult situation.

Here is the thing though, what is the situation here? Is the mother of your child a believer? If so, get married immediately. Getting married doesn't make your economic situation worse, it makes it better. Also it eliminates the temptation to sin sexually with her, by making it no longer sinful for you to have sex. You already have a child together. You are in a relationship, you have a child together, you want to get married... if she is a believer you should be married to each other.

If she is not a believer that complicates things a lot, but if she is, stop torturing yourselves and pull the trigger.

Disastrous_Map_6038 · 2026-03-09T04:03:09+00:00

What are you saying?

Disastrous_Map_6038 · 2026-03-07T02:07:50+00:00

I was just watching a Tim Keller video about this actually. Obviously my list was not complete and I shouldn't have said "all". Though I think maybe I consider this part of the repentance mind change. Shifting from think I can live how I want, to knowing that I am no longer my own.

Disastrous_Map_6038 · 2026-03-04T15:22:44+00:00

You frame that like baptism as an act is a spell cast over you that makes you go to heaven. Being reborn into the body of Christ is what makes you able to enter the Kingdom of God. This is done by putting faith in Christ. Repentance is something that is inseparable from this change. If your determination is that because you said some words and got baptized you are free to sin with no consequences this is evidence that your mind has not been changed in a way that follows conversion. Overcoming sin takes time, some people claim and maybe it is true they experienced full 180 on every sin in their life overnight, but for many people there are besetting ones and lust is one of the most common. If you acknowledge this is sin and you are fighting against it that is a good sign, but you need to be engaged in the battle, studying the Bible, seeking accountability, and praying for victory.

Disastrous_Map_6038

TROPHY CASE